King v. Etchebarren

California Court of Appeal Jun 16, 1960 No. Civ. No. 9807Published

Before: Schottky

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the ledger sheet constituted a valid book account, and that the action was not barred by the statute of limitations because it was commenced within the four-year period prescribed for book accounts.

Issues

Whether the ledger sheet constituted a valid book account.
Whether there was a fatal variance between the pleading of a mutual account and the finding of a book account.
Whether the action was barred by the statute of limitations.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The records were sufficient to support a cause of action on a book account.”

“The administration of justice is not improved by slavish adherence to technical rules of pleading”

“The evidence was sufficient to support the court’s findings that appellant’s indebtedness to respondent was set forth in a book account and that the action was not barred by the statute of limitations.”

SCHOTTKY, J. Pierre Etchebarren has appealed from a judgment in favor of Karl Y. King in an action brought by King to recover money due on an account.

In 1948 after conferring with certain California ranchers King sought to help alleviate the shortage of qualified sheepherders by bringing qualified sheepherders to California from Europe. In order to do this it became necessary for him to seek changes in the immigration laws in order for certain sheepherders to qualify for admission into the United States. In many instances King advanced the necessary transportation costs for the immigrants. The costs and expenses incurred in lobbying were prorated among the sheepherders who were admitted under the revised laws. In addition, King charged each sheepherder $150 as attorney’s fees to reimburse him for his time and effort.

Mr. King went to Europe where, acting through an agent who spoke the language of the country where the interview was being conducted, he interviewed the prospective admittees. The agent was instructed to advise each sheepherder that the rancher by whom he was employed would deduct the costs due King from the wages earned by him. Etchebarren was one of the sheepherders whose travel expenses were advanced by King.

[804]Etchebarren came to the United States in 1951. King was unable to locate him until 1957, at which time he wrote a letter to him in which he asked him for payment. Etchebarren in his reply stated :

“My intentions with regard to payment for my immigration are and always have been to accept fully this responsibility. However, I have never had any knowledge of my benefactor in this instance, for at no time was the name of the person who arranged passage for me and those like me, afforded us.

„ “If you are that person, you are certainly entitled to compensation for actual expenses incurred in connection with my immigration. In order that I may be assured that you are, in fact, the person to whom I am indebted, I should very much appreciate it if you would furnish me with copies of receipts of payments made in this regard, and any other information which may establish your identity to my full satisfaction. ’ ’

King then wrote Etchebarren giving him the requested information.

King in 1954, prior to locating Etchebarren, filed the instant action against Etchebarren and many others. The cause of action relating to Etchebarren alleged that Etchebarren was indebted to King in the sum of $904.48 upon a mutual, open and current account, with interest from May 13, 1952, and this indebtedness was incurred within four years prior to the filing of the complaint.

King v. Etchebarren

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief